• Psychedelic Drugs Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
    PD's Best Threads Index
    Social ThreadSupport Bluelight
    Psychedelic Beginner's FAQ
  • PD Moderators: Esperighanto | JackARoe |

When and why was DOET scheduled?

JBrandon

Greenlighter
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
1,020
I'm always fascinated by the twists and turns that lead to compounds being scheduled, but I can't seem to find any information regarding what happened with DOET. Does anyone know the story and care to relate it to me? Seems too rare to have come to DEA attention...
 
Probably because it is classified as a positional isomer of a schedule 1 controlled substance. The DEA doesn't need any more reason than that.
 
Positional isomer of what? It's not an isomer of DOM or any of the TMAs.
 
tma-6 is a positional isomer of a scheduled substance and it isn't scheduled. I don't think that's a very good explanation for why a basically unheard of compound is specifically scheduled.
 
^True. But then when has there ever been a good reason to "schedule" a molecule. It's pathetic.

I thought this one would be a great little psychedelic. Shulgin seems to think so. Let's hope one day all laws will evaporate.
 
"Explanation" not "reason" - I just wanted the bare facts of why they actually felt justified in doing so, though I don't expect them to be good reasons - they're never good reasons, lol.
 
It was scheduled in 1993, apparently in 1992 the DEA had discovered clandestine labs making it, so perhaps that's what turned their attention to it.
http://isomerdesign.com/Cdsa/FR/58FR4316.pdf

edit: That rule also says that it's to bring the US in compliance with the Convention on Psychotropic Substances, so perhaps it was scheduled internationally first?
 
Nice find FattestGoth, see also http://isomerdesign.com/Cdsa/FR/52FR41736.pdf

Yeah it sounds like it was scheduled by the UN commission on narcotic drugs in 1986, based on the 1971 convention on psychotropic drugs (http://www.incb.org/incb/convention_1971.html), and the US just scheduled it to comply with that. So now I guess the question is, why was it included in the 1971 convention? I can't find much written about it from that period, there's the patent by Shulgin from 1969, a couple of human studies by Snyder (link to one), a study showing it's more potent than DOM at disrupting squirrel monkeys performance on a task, and it makes rats take longer to start swimming.

Most of the Snyder papers say something like '2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylamphetamine (I) produced significant subjective effects, such as a mild euphoria and enhanced self-awareness, in the complete absence of hallucinogenic or psychotomimetic effects.' because they weren't using high enough doses, so there was little to suggest the drug could have been much of a 'threat.'
 
Last edited:
Thanks FattestGoth & Skillet! Exactly the type of answers I was looking for.
 
DOET is the 3-Carbon (amphetamine) version of 2C-E: 2,5-dimethoxy-4-ethylamphetamine.

2C-EF gets a mention in the entry for DOEF - 2,5-dimethoxy-4-(2-flouroethyl)amphetamine. 2C-EF looks to be the 2-Carbon phenethylamine version of DOEF. From reading this entry, it is unclear whether Shulgin physically synthesised and tested any 2C-EF, but speculates it is likely to be fairly potent. Link:

http://isomerdesign.com/PiHKAL/read.php?domain=pk&id=65
 
Last edited:
Yeah, from my research on 2c-ef I only was able to seem to find correlates exactly with what you said, but reading on a thread on I believe either BL or Shroomery I read a post about someone having found and ingested some of this supposed synthesis. He seemed fairly adamant as to its legitimacy as being 2c-ef and not any of the other RC's that are more common.

I had reviewed that particular PiHKAL entry on erowid thinking that because no further documentation was given by Shulgin about the matter, one might come to presume that he never actually synthesized the chem. So then that leads me to think, if he did in fact ingest 2c-ef, that an experienced biochemist must have followed Shulgin's rough directions for synthesizing it from the PiHKAL and created his own batch.

After saying that, I'm not sure that I believe that a chemist would take the time to synthesize 2c-ef using rather rough directions instead of something whose method of synthesizing has been well practiced and documented. I'm personally leaning towards BS on the side of whoever posted that they had in fact consumed it.
 
Is there any qualitative information about the trip or incidence of physical effects? 2C-EF is extraordinarily rare and I for one would love to find out more in the way of experiences with it (and DOET, DOEF as well as any other of the more unusual 2- and 3-Carbon phenethylamines). Is there any data on dosages?
 
Are you talking about DOET? There are 2 trip reports on erowid for DOET, besides what Shulgin wrote.

2C-EF is reported on by both fastandbulbous and B9 in seperate trip reports here on bluelight, in the Trip Reports forum:

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/threads/526230-2C-EF-first-time-another-wonderful-drug-experience
http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/threads/526620-(2C-EF-10-mg)-New-experience-It-s-a-wonderful-night

There is very little on anecdotal DOEF reports outside of pihkal. There is this:

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/threads/...amphetamine)?p=7194243&viewfull=1#post7194243
 
DexterMeth said:
This is why I love such things as phenazepam. It will never get scheduled in the US.
Just wait, someone's bound to do something stupid with it, cause a media sensation, and have moms and politicians demanding action. Always happens.
 
Top